Yes, it really sucks. But at least 1-2 times a year this should be done otherwise the value of the award will lower (and this award is a very good one to fight for in some categories). If they are to be revised in certain time - for example, around NY and the end of June, everyone will be aware of this so no moaning

 

Oh, and don't add the achievement for the newcoming socket at least half a year - until the first wave of popularity is over.

Edited June 15, 201014 yr by Antinomy

Can i see the 939 ranking? 754 and am2 (non-plus, if you split those) would be funny too.

You have 900+ points, #2 doesn't even have 200

You have 900+ points, #2 doesn't even have 200

 

How far away from 1000?

about 80p iirc

knut is nuts as always on those a64.

@massman: looks good to me. Maybe add a small icon in the bottom right to seperate ocking/guru

 

Any ideas for the icon. Underneath looks kinda lame, I think

 

Why not make a golden label like the "level X" ones and write "king" on it? This will differ the guy from "Gurus". Simple as it sounds

Why not make a golden label like the "level X" ones and write "king" on it? This will differ the guy from "Gurus". Simple as it sounds

 

Good idea!

 

 

 

Just noticed I forgot to remove 'King' from the name field. Just an example, so no biggie.

will we have the best achievement in the sign?

lol thx

Yes, that's exactly what I thought it would like. And the king is bigger, good catch.

will we have the best achievement in the sign?

Would be very nice, but how to tell which is better?

let the user choose

That's what I had in my mind, but it may be a little complicated for coding.

Another achievements suggestion - "Magic people, Voodoo people" - bench one card of the each following series - Voodoo3, Voodoo4 and Voodoo 5. I mean - at least one of each series.

 

Hey, Massman, you are free to check this out for achievements: http://www.wow-achievements.com/achievements/general/none/

 

And you can make an achievement "I've spent my life on this" - the total time of all benchmarks - the 2D are easily counted, the 3D all but Aqua have fixed length and Aqua can be calculated with it's score.

So the levels would be - I've spend an hour, I've spent a day/week/month/qr./year/life

I think some of us won't leave no matter the score they see.

 

The only reaction most will show is a smile like this -

then end up with their coffee and say - were the hell was that last dewar I kept for the rainy day?

 

It's not a right measurement since you run one benchmark multiple times for one score. If you see 6.7s in 1M, it means you spend 10 hours getting that score

I know. But this is a thing that can't be measured. The total benchmark time - can be

Just tried the query - the problem is that some impossible scores (that are not blocked) mess up the ranking.

too many achievements kill the achievements IMO

... "Achievement King", "Achievement Guru", "Achievement Junkie"

Oh, and don't add the achievement for the newcoming socket at least half a year - until the first wave of popularity is over.

 

And that's when exactly?

 

Initially, I was thinking about only doing this for discontinued platforms, but it's not a bad idea to also do this for very new platforms (it's maybe easier to be king, but if it's easier more people will try to get it, so it becomes difficult again?)

 

If we revise caps every 6 months, we can add this kind of achievement to every new platform no problem.

Well, every platform becomes discontinued sooner or later, I don't think there's a difference when to add it to the achievements.

Maybe someone likes to perform in only new hardware. And the old school guys will try to get the Socket A award most likely. So I see no problem. But add only desktop platforms - the server and mobile ones are not that fun IMO.

I think all platforms should be added. Server stuff isnt that exciting, but that's not really an excuse to not include those IMO.